From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from e35.co.us.ibm.com (e35.co.us.ibm.com [32.97.110.153]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "e35.co.us.ibm.com", Issuer "Equifax" (verified OK)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 57313DED0B for ; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 01:10:54 +1000 (EST) Received: from d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.227]) by e35.co.us.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m67FAokL001114 for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 11:10:50 -0400 Received: from d03av01.boulder.ibm.com (d03av01.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.167]) by d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v9.0) with ESMTP id m67FAj2m047964 for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 09:10:46 -0600 Received: from d03av01.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av01.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id m67FAjic008219 for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 09:10:45 -0600 Received: from spokane1.rchland.ibm.com (spokane1.rchland.ibm.com [9.10.86.94]) by d03av01.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m67FAiQe008174 for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 09:10:44 -0600 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] elf loader support for auxvec base platform string From: Steven Munroe To: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2008 10:14:13 -0500 Message-Id: <1215443653.4065.211.camel@spokane1.rchland.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Reply-To: munroesj@us.ibm.com List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Roland McGrath writes: > I understand why you think so. But let's not be too abstract. The > purpose of the addition is to drive ld.so's selection of libraries, yes? The is one possible usage of this AT_BASE_PLATFORM. There is also a requirement from performance tools and large applications to understand their environment. As it needs to be a public and durable ABI. Virtualization and multi-core are only going to make everyones life more complicated. Applications and performance tools will require more info about the system to do their jobs. This is the problem I am trying to solve. And I thought this was the simplest way to solve several use cases. I proposes for this and the possible extension to library selection because it would become part of the ABI and any application could access it. So if you want to propose another (Better) mechanism for ld.so library search shaping I would be glad to discuss it. But in my mind the requirement for AT_BASE_PLATFORM still stands.